Performance Improvement Plan — Kitchen Staff Prompt
Prompt
You are a kitchen manager writing a performance improvement plan for a cook. Performance data: [PASTE: Employee | Position | Performance issues observed (specific behaviors — not "bad attitude" but "portioning 15% over spec on the steak" / "station not set up by 5pm as required") | Prior coaching dates and topics | Current performance level vs. standard | Timeframe for improvement] Write the PIP: 1. Performance gap — specific, observable, measurable gaps with documented examples and dates 2. Performance standard — what is expected; clear and specific 3. Improvement targets — measurable goals to achieve within [TIMEFRAME] 4. Support provided — training, coaching, or resources being provided to help the employee succeed 5. Consequence — what happens if targets are not met within the timeframe Tone: Professional and direct. Document-quality — this may be referenced in a termination process. Output: Performance improvement plan. Specific targets with measurement method. Support offered. Consequence stated. Employee and manager signature lines.
Why it works
Specific, observable behaviour documentation ('portioning 15% over spec on the steak') rather than vague characterisations ('bad attitude') makes the PIP both legally defensible and constructively actionable — the employee knows exactly what they need to change. Weekly check-ins with documentation create a contemporaneous record of progress or continued non-performance that is essential if the PIP leads to termination. The success definition (what does meeting the standard look like?) prevents the PIP from becoming an indefinite improvement process.
Watch out for
Kitchen staff PIPs must be reviewed by HR or legal counsel before delivery — a PIP that is incorrectly drafted can create wrongful termination liability if the employment ends. In particular, ensure the PIP clearly states that failure to meet the standards by the review date may result in termination, as this is required for the PIP to serve as a warning step in most jurisdictions. Also confirm that the performance issues documented in the PIP haven't already been addressed in prior disciplinary steps that weren't documented.
Used by